Xbox hasn’t made a profit since the middle of the 360 generation.People talking about Xbox profits when MS is so ashamed of them it keeps them hidden!
YTD: PS5 14.5 m; NSW 9.91 m; X/S ~ 4.15 m
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
That video was February 2023
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
www.tweaktown.com
Why is it so easy to debunk everything you say?
A YouTube video from an Xbox shill and a comment from a pathologically lying CEO aren’t evidence
That video was February 2023
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
Why is it so easy to debunk everything you say?
Who cares who made the video? He provides evidence for every retailer lol
And Phil can't lie about profits. Sue him if you think he is, you'll be rich if you're right.
I can say the same of you with far greater applicability.
That video was February 2023
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
Why is it so easy to debunk everything you say?
Never forget, you’re the moron who thinks he has credibility even after admitting that you pump up your Xbox guesstimates to cheerlead for your lord and saviour Phil.
It's very possible Xbox and Gamepass are profitable if Microsoft are doing what I expect them to do to masquerade the black hole that whole division is: Not charge the division for Azure's costs.
And they could be even more profitable if there hadn't been ademand supply shortage.
And they could be even more profitable if there hadn't been a
OP
OP
Yeah the shortage narrative was a joke.
Inappropriate language
Ever notice how MS only reports Xbox REVENUE since about 2010?
Who cares who made the video? He provides evidence for every retailer lol
And Phil can't lie about profits. Sue him if you think he is, you'll be rich if you're right.
They stopped reporting direct P&L for that division when shareholders got annoyed about it losing money quarter after quarter.
Phil isn't lying about profit, he is not talking about profit at all. Only total dent-heads like you think there's nothing shady or odd about breaking out revenue by division, but not profit and loss numbers. Most companies will show revenue and profit/loss for individual groups within the company, or not break down revenue by division if they don't also provide the P&L breakdown.
So, nice strawman.
Last edited by a moderator:
Why can't he give a straight answer? He says they're profitable (and btw you don't report revenues when you have actual profits) which we know to be patently false given how they attribute costs. What's profitable? Not the hardware. That they've admitted in court. Not game development. You can't make a return on development costs if you don't sell your games. Definitely not the business as a whole post-acquisition spend, which doesn't even sit in Xbox's P&L.
That video was February 2023
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
Why is it so easy to debunk everything you say?
The only way GP is profitable is if they attribute the costs of hosting to another MS division, the costs of gamedev to the studios themselves, and then pretend like the only additional cost is that of getting third party content onto the platform, which subscriber revenue *might* be able to cover.
Look at this snake oil:
That's because people understand that if sales rev>dev and other associated costs, you've made a profit.
That's because people also understand that subscriptions are the single biggest value-destructive business model in history.
More than a couple, and investing in a suboptimal return on the face of it is a tried and true strategy to grow your brand in gaming, but the only way the math is very similar for them is that they would be better off releasing any exclusives they have now on PlayStation to generate more income. It sounds like they're still trying to grow the base through subsidies.
Whoops
It really comes across as a ponzi (because it is). We can take a loss on Game X because getting them on the platform leads to long term growth, but the platform you're getting them on contains games Y, Z, and so forth that also took a loss to get people on the platform. So what is on there that keeps players spending to make up for decreases in sales elsewhere? Nothing. There isn't anything. I assume most think the aggregate of products negates losses but those products, again, are aggregate losses so it's impossible.
And the best example as to why GP will fail is the Epic Store. They gave away lots, and decent, games for free and built libraries for people, but none of them use it. Having access to content isn't good in of itself, which Phil obviously doesn't get per his comments on losing the last generation. Even if you transition these people on to GP for 6m, what have you lost in sales for other products in order to gain back the box cost of the game you just released to get them on the service? It's a ponzi.
Last edited:
The amount of cope trying to spin profitable into meaning revenue is out of this world.
Whole lot of assumptions for no reason other than "Xbox must be in the red". Even when Xbox was doing well enough to "take share" from PS5 and lead in different nations, Microsoft refused to reveal numbers. Even when MAU was doing fine, they hid those too. Microsoft hiding numbers is not evidence of hiding losses.
Gotta laugh at the "don't sell games" part. You know nothing about Xbox.
Also Phil already corrected the FTC about what acquiring an asset means but here you go.
Phil literally described people like you in that quote and you're still getting stuck on how Game Pass makes money.
Xbox is generating more revenue in the Game Pass era than ever, and Game Pass is profitable. Software still sells on Xbox and Steam, along with third party games and MTX. How do you think Xbox Content and Services (software and subscriptions) keeps generating more revenue every year? If software were really going down by a substantial amount and Game Pass is only 10%-20% of C&S, they wouldn't be generating +$3B a quarter.
Starfield brought in the biggest increase of Game Pass subs in a single day.
And Xbox revenue generated last quarter was higher than expected, with Starfield being directly mentioned as being part of that happening.
The narratives aren't working in the face of results.
Last edited by a moderator:
Simping for Spencer?
The amount of cope trying to spin profitable into meaning revenue is out of this world.
Whole lot of assumptions for no reason other than "Xbox must be in the red". Even when Xbox was doing well enough to "take share" from PS5 and lead in different nations, Microsoft refused to reveal numbers. Even when MAU was doing fine, they hid those too. Microsoft hiding numbers is not evidence of hiding losses.
Gotta laugh at the "don't sell games" part. You know nothing about Xbox.
Also Phil already corrected the FTC about what acquiring an asset means but here you go.
Phil literally described people like you in that quote and you're still getting stuck on how Game Pass makes money.
Xbox is generating more revenue in the Game Pass era than ever, and Game Pass is profitable. Software still sells on Xbox and Steam, along with third party games and MTX. How do you think Xbox Content and Services (software and subscriptions) keeps generating more revenue every year? If software were really going down by a substantial amount and Game Pass is only 10%-20% of C&S, they wouldn't be generating +$3B a quarter.
Starfield brought in the biggest increase of Game Pass subs in a single day.
And Xbox revenue generated last quarter was higher than expected, with Starfield being directly mentioned as being part of that happening.
The narratives aren't working in the face of results.
Here's a quick one: when I buy a game, is it that I'm not actually spending money, but transferring the value of my $70 into a digital license?
Phil Spencer says yes.
In (a simplified version of) reality, 70 billion dollars left Microsoft's bank account and went into the pockets of ABK shareholders in exchange for a company of indeterminate value. They do not have the 70 billion anymore. It's money spent and gone. An outflow.
As for this horseshit
They continue to buy more revenue sources. This isn't incongruously with your understanding of what Xbox is doing so why don't you see it?
You're actually too stupid to have a discussion with. You don't understand basic economics, and you don't understand that Microsoft's future is as a third party dev. All of their growth has come from buying 3rd party publishers and peddling their wares off the Xbox platform. Steam is not Xbox, PlayStation is not GP, Nintendo is not XBL. It's nothing to boast about - it's what third party publishers have been doing for years.
And Starfield could not have been profitable for Xbox under any circumstances. Estimates have it at 200m to develop and lord knows how much to market - all for what? A player count lower than Skyrim's, launch sales lower than Fallout 4 (and nearly every other big release this year), fewer nominations than Goodbye Volcano High, and a surge in one month GP subs because even Xidiots know paying $12 for a game is cheaper than buying it at retail. They won't stick around.
Last edited:
It is actually possible through creative accounting to have ABK listed as $70b worth of "assets" on Microsoft's balance sheets even though fair market value would probably put it closer to $40b.
When they add all the revenue from COD next quarter are you really going to say that Xbox keeps growing and having amazing results?Starfield brought in the biggest increase of Game Pass subs in a single day.
And Xbox revenue generated last quarter was higher than expected, with Starfield being directly mentioned as being part of that happening.
The narratives aren't working in the face of results.
For someone that follows the industry, I think it's a very dishonest way to look at it. Nothing was gained from that, literally just a number on Excel.
Of course he is. That's his agenda
Never forget, Welfare admitted that he added to the calculated amount of Xbox sales to “counter negativity”.
He’s a shill hiding behind his bullshit numbers and is as dishonest and incompetent as VGChartz.
OP
OP
Oh tht was him!? I remember that but didn't remember the name, if so nothing he says is valid!!!